Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Cost Allocation
Hui Jiang, You-qing Zhou, Jian-chun Peng
of power loss to determine the using potion, which has a more Then, the congestion cost allocated to line 1 ( AFI ) is
clear physical mean. AFl = AF x al (15)
Using potion of a power element incurred by a generator is
Where pl is dual factor for constraint I (line I) corresponding
defined as the ratio of the active power loss on the element
h
incurred by the generator to the total active power loss on the to (7). It is obvious that C a , = 1 . Notation b is the total
element. /=I
number of the system lines.
- 950 -
B. Congestion cost normalized to each generator $Dkm < P, , the curtailment
It is easy to obtain:
According to the new definition, the active loss allocation is k=l
the basis of congestion cost allocation, For congested line I, n
(P, - Dkm.) is active power losses.
the congestion cost allocated to it is AFl . The congestion cost k=l
-, Definition: the proportion of the active power component
component Tii contributed to line 1 by generator m is:
absorbed by the load at bus k from generator rn to the total
TZ, = U f , h F , (16) generator rn supplying to load is pkm
Summation of T f / to all branches yields the total Dmk
Pkm =n
congestion cost ( T," ) for generator m: c
h=l
Dhrn
b
n
T," = CU,$AFl (17)
l=I For generator m, we can obtain Pkm= 1 .
k=l
The congestion cost normalized to each generator side then
As described in section 3, the congestion cost corresponding
hrther allocated to the generator and consumers or between
two sides of transactions on a pro-rata basis which they all to generator m that consumers should pay is Tf, , we can
agree with. allocated the cost to each load in proportional of the active
power component absorbed by the load from generator m..
C. Congestion cost allocated to each generator
For load k, assume the congestion cost corresponding to
Assume the ratio of the congestion cost allocated to
generator rn to the total congestion cost normalized to generator rn is C&
b
generator rn is p . Then the congestion cost C i allocated to C&=Pkmqi, " D " k x ( l - p ) x C u : i A F [ (22)
/=I
generator rn is Dhrn
h=l
Cj = pT," (1 8)
Summation of C& to all generators yields the total
Assume the difference between T," and 'C: is T:, .
congestion cost C,d that the load k should pay
T:, = T A - C,f, =(I - p)T: (19)
Then the difference should be allocated to bus loads to
m=l
which generator rn supplies electricity.
It is obvious that the summation of C; to all generators VI. NUMERICAL RESULTS
yields p A F l . The section presents an illustrative example based on a five-
bus test system to show the results using different congestion
V. CONGESTION COST ALLOCATED TO EACH cost allocation methods. The five-bus test system is depicted in
CONSUMER Fig. 1.
The congestion cost can allocate to each consumer by the
contributions of consumer incurred by individual generator. 100+j48 100+j20.3 180+j82
The section focuses on discussing which consumer contributes
to the congestion and how much it should pay.
In [4],[5], the principals of contributions of individual
generators to complex power losses and flows are discussed. N
2~~ = D ,
m=l
For generator rn, the power from generator m absorbed by
n Fig I 5-bus system
loads is D, ,
k=l
An hour period is considered in the simulation. Assume the
system operation state remains consistent The nodal demands
(MVA) and branch impedances (n)are shown in Fig.1. There
are two generators GI1,GI2at bus 1, and two generators GSI,
-951 -
G52 at bus 5. The electricity prices of each generator are as The paper presents a new method for congestion cost
foI Iows . allocation based on Lagrange multiplier. The congestion cost
Gii: 5($/MWh), G12: IS($/MWh), is allocated to both generators and consumers that have
G5i: IO($/MWh), G52: 20:($/MWh). contributions to the system congestion. As a result, it is
The upper limits of generating are meaningful economically and intuitively. Compared with the
PGI I m a x = l 5(MW), PGiZrnax=l 5(MW) existing methods, it is more reasonable and it eliminates not
PC351max=1 5(MW), PG52rnax=115(MW) only the merchandising surplus, but also the mutual
The unconstrained schedule results in overload of line 1-2 and compensations. The P-Q interaction is taken into account
5-4. The upper limits of both lines are: directly and accurately. The new method has clarity physical
I.zmax= 105.8(MVA), ZS-4max= 1 60.6(MVA).
Z mean. It is fair enough and easy to practice. It is not restricted
In the constrained schedule line 1-2 and 5-4 flow limits are to power pool, but can be extended to bilateral mode.
binding (,I& =63.3531, L,L~-; = 0.2544). The congestion cost
is$65.3(=$4075.3-$40 10).
VIII. REFERENCES
Theory of branch complex power components proposed in
Thomas W G. On Transmission Congestion and Pricing IEEE
[4-51 is used to obtain the load components (contributions of Transactions on PWS. 1999.14(1):pp 241-248.
generators to loads), and then the congestion cost allocation is H.Singh,S.Y.Hao,and Alex Papalexopoulos.Traiismission Congestion
calculated using the presented method. The results of Management in Competitive Electricity Markets.IEEE Transaaction on
PWS. 1998.13(2).pp 672-679
congestion costs allocation to both generators and consumers
Anastasios G.Bakirtzis,Aumann-Shapley Transmission Congestion
are listed in table I and 11, respectively. For convenience of PricingJEEE Power Enineering Review.2001 3:pp 67-69.
comparison, the results of two alternatives are also listed in Jian-chun Peng, Hui Jiang. Contributions of Individual Generators to
both tables. One is called nodal pricing method. The other is Complex Power Losses and Flows-Part 1 : Fundamental Theory IEE
Proc.-Gener. Trunsm.Dislrib., 2002.3 149(2):pp 182-185
called buy-backhplift method. Under buy-backiuplift, the total Jian-chun Peng, Hui Jiang. Contributions of Individual Generators to
congestion cost is first split into two parts, generator side and Complex Power Losses and Flows-Part 2: Algorithm and Simulations.
consumer side share equally. On each side, the congestion cost IEE Proc.-Gener. Trunsm. Disrrib., 2002 3, 149(2) pp 186-190
is then allocated to individual participators according to their
active power. IX. BIOGRAPHIES
Hui Jiang is a lecture of Electrical Energy Systems i n
Hunan University, Changsha P R China She
GI I GI2 Gj I Gj2 obtained her BSc in Power Engineering from
Presented Method 15 755 14 179 2 126 0 590 Chongqing University in 1990, and MSc in Electrical
Nodal Pricing 575 517 5 0 0 Engineering from Hunan University in 1999 Now,
Buv-Back 9 795 8 816 10988 3051 she is pursuing her doctor degree Her interests
include electricity market, power system economic
operation, and computer applications in power
systems
Dz D3 D4
Presented Method 12 8632 12 8630 6 9238 You-qing Zhou IS Professor of Electrical Energy Systems in Hunan
Nodal Pricing 3147 43 891 73 994 932 University, Changsha, P R China , His interests include new transmission
Buv-Back 8 5921 8 5921 15 4658 system, and power system automation
The results in Table I and II show that the nodal pricing Jian-chun Peng IS Professor of Electrical Energy
method can result in merchandizing surplus ($6061.3), while Systems in Hunan University, Changsha, P R
China ,He obtained his BSc and MSc from
the presented method and buy-backiuplift ones can not. It is Chongqing University in 1986 and 1989,
obvious that the active power output of generator G5,is 129 respectively, and PhD from Hunan University in
MWh, occupying 33.65% of the total system generation, and is 1998, all in Electrical Engineering His interests
the biggest of all. However, using the presented method, the include electricity market, power system economic
operation, power system stability and control, and
congestion cost that generator G 5 ,has to pay for is almost the
computer applications in power systems
least, occupying only 6.5% of the total. On consumer side, the (Jianchunpeng@hotmakom)
electric energy absorbed by D4 is 180 MWh, occupying
47.37% of the total system load, and is the biggest of all. But
the congestion cost it has to pay for is $6.9238, occupying
5.3%, is the least of all. It is because the results are based on
the contributions of generators to the system congestion, while
under buy-back method, the congestion cost is allocated
proportionally to participators active power.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
- 952 -